DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment/arguments filed on 08/18/2025. Claims 1 and 10 have been cancelled. Claims 2 and 11 have been amended. Currently, claims 2-9 and 11-17 are pending. This action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to amended claims 2 and 11 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
As stated in the Non-Final Rejection dated 07/25/2025, paragraphs [0001]-[0003] of APAA describes three logical groups of receivers within the building:
- Group 1: multiple (plurality of) receivers that already obtain acceptable carrier-to-noise ratios in the existing system;
- Group 2: any receiver located at significant distance from the pre-amplifier with significant signal loss and noise ;
- Group 3: the combination of Group 1 and Group 2.
Regarding claims 2 and 11, on page 2 of the remark, Applicant argues that the new limitation “at least one of the plurality of receivers is located such that if a conventional (non-solar) power supply were used to operate the preamplifier, antenna-captured OTA- transmitted RF signals delivered to that receiver would be characterized by carrier to noise rations at or below the acceptable threshold” requires that the plurality receivers must include at least one receiver falling into the group the Examiner identified as “Group 2”. The Examiner respectfully disagreed. The new limitation recites the phrase “carrier to noise rations at or below the acceptable threshold”, which requires “carrier to noise rations at the acceptable threshold” or “carrier to noise rations below the acceptable threshold”. When the phrase “carrier to noise rations at or below the acceptable threshold” be read as “carrier to noise rations at the acceptable threshold”, the claim does not require at least one of the plurality of receivers to fall within Group 2. Furthermore, par [0001] of APAA teaches “at acceptable quality levels”. Therefore, the combination of APAA and Wilken discloses the claimed limitation in question above.
Regarding claims 2 and 11, on pages 2-3 of the remark, Applicant argues the Wilken reference teach the delivery of amplified, antenna-captured signal to receivers in vehicle at a truck stop or campground, no within a single building served by conventional electrical network. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. APAA discloses everything (i.e. delivery of amplified, antenna-captured signal to receivers within a single building served by conventional electrical network) and only lacks a solar power unit for the antenna system of the building. Wilken discloses a rooftop of a vehicle or building (par [0034]) having an amplifier 110 for pre-amplifying the signal received by the antenna before further processing or output (par [0040]-[0041]), and the power source of the antenna system including the amplifier 110 is a solar cell array (par [0072]-[0076]). Therefore, Wilken discloses what’s lacking from APAA, and the combination of APAA in view of Wilken discloses the claimed invention.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
For the dependent claims, see response above.
Response to Amendment
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-5, 9 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prior Art Admission by Applicant (hereinafter “APAA”, see Background of US 20240048223 A1) in view of Wilken (US 20170331185 A1).
Consider claim 2, APAA discloses a system to process antenna-captured OTA-transmitted RF signals for delivery to a plurality of receivers at a corresponding plurality of locations within a building (read as the mast-mounted antenna system for capturing over the air (OTA) broadcast RF signals and delivering them to the receivers within a building, par [0001]); the system comprising:
a pre-amplifier connected to: a single antenna, mounted on a mast positioned outside the building; the plurality of receivers (read as the pre-amplifier, single antenna mounted on a mast located on rooftop corner location, and multiple receivers; par [0001]- [0002]); and a power unit (read as the power system for supplying power to the pre-amplifier, par [0003]);
wherein the power unit is configured to deliver power to operate the pre-amplifier (read as the power unit for supplying power to the pre-amplifier, par [0003]); and
wherein the pre-amplifier is configured to amplify antenna-captured OTA-transmitted RF signals and deliver the amplified antenna-captured OTA-transmitted RF signals to the receivers, such that each of the plurality of receivers receive signals at a carrier to noise ratio above an acceptable threshold (read as system having antenna for capturing OTA broadcast RF signals, a pre-amplifier that amplifies antenna-captured OTA broadcast RF signals and delivers signals of acceptable carrier to noise ratio (C/N) to multiple receivers throughout the building (excluding the extreme situations), regardless of (i.e. independent of) the current locations of these receivers, par [0001]-[0002]);
wherein at least one of the plurality of receivers is located such that if a conventional (non-solar) power supply were used to operate the preamplifier, antenna-captured OTA- transmitted RF signals delivered to that receiver would be characterized by carrier to noise rations at or below the acceptable threshold (read as at least one of the multipole receivers located such that the conventional (non-solar) electrical network having the power unit were used to operate the pre-amplifier, the signals received of the OTA antenna delivered to the receive would at acceptable quality (carrier-to-noise ratio) level, par [0001]-[0003]).
However, APAA discloses the claimed inventio above but does not specifically disclose the power unit is a solar power unit.
Nonetheless, in related art, Wilken discloses an antenna system on a rooftop of a vehicle or building (par [0034]) having an amplifier 110 for pre-amplifying the signal received by the antenna before further processing or output (par [0040]-[0041]), and the power source of the antenna system including the amplifier 110 is a solar cell array (par [0072]-[0076]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Wilken into the teaching of APAA to use solar power as one of the power sources to reducing power cost.
Consider claim 3, as applied to claim 2 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses wherein the pre-amplifier is attached to the mast (read as the antenna system having the pre-amplifier is mast-mounted, par [0001] and [0002]).
Consider claim 4, as applied to claim 2 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses wherein the pre-amplifier is integrated with the antenna forming a single amplified antenna unit attached to the mast (read as the amplifier/pre-amplifier is one of the circuit elements of antenna system, par [0039]-[0041 of Wilken).
Consider claim 5, as applied to claim 2 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses wherein the solar power unit comprises a solar panel and a rechargeable battery (read as the different power sources comprising solar cells and batteries, par [0039]-[0041] of Wilken).
Consider claim 9, as applied to claim 5 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses wherein the rechargeable battery is integrated with an amplified antenna unit comprising the pre-amplifier integrated with the antenna (read as the onboard batteries within the antenna system, par [0041] of Wilken).
Consider claim 11, APAA discloses a method to process antenna-captured OTA-transmitted RF signals for delivery to a plurality of receivers at a corresponding plurality of locations within a building (read as the mast-mounted antenna system for capturing over the air (OTA) broadcast RF signals and delivering them to the receivers within a building, par [0001]); the method comprising:
connecting a pre-amplifier connected to: a single antenna, mounted on a mast positioned outside the building; the plurality of receivers (read as the pre-amplifier, single antenna mounted on a mast located on rooftop corner location, and multiple receivers; par [0001]- [0002]); and a power unit (read as the power system for supplying power to the pre-amplifier, par [0003]);
wherein the power unit is configured to deliver power to operate the pre-amplifier (read as the power unit for supplying power to the pre-amplifier, par [0003]); and
operating the pre-amplifier to amplify antenna-captured OTA-transmitted RF signals and deliver the amplified antenna-captured OTA-transmitted RF signals to the receivers, such that each of the plurality of receivers receive signals at a carrier to noise ratio above an acceptable threshold (read as system having antenna for capturing OTA broadcast RF signals, a pre-amplifier that amplifies antenna-captured OTA broadcast RF signals and delivers signals of acceptable carrier to noise ratio (C/N) to multiple receivers throughout the building (excluding the extreme situations), regardless of (i.e. independent of) the current locations of these receivers, par [0001]-[0002]);
wherein at least one of the plurality of receivers is located such that if a conventional (non-solar) power supply were used to operate the preamplifier, antenna-captured OTA- transmitted RF signals delivered to that receiver would be characterized by carrier to noise rations at or below the acceptable threshold (read as at least one of the multipole receivers located such that the conventional (non-solar) electrical network having the power unit were used to operate the pre-amplifier, the signals received of the OTA antenna delivered to the receive would at acceptable quality (carrier-to-noise ratio) level, par [0001]-[0003]).
However, APAA discloses the claimed inventio above but does not specifically disclose the power unit is a solar power unit.
Nonetheless, in related art, Wilken discloses an antenna system on a rooftop of a vehicle or building (par [0034]) having an amplifier 110 for pre-amplifying the signal received by the antenna before further processing or output (par [0040]-[0041]), and the power source of the antenna system including the amplifier 110 is a solar cell array (par [0072]-[0076]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Wilken into the teaching of APAA to use solar power as one of the power sources to reducing power cost.
Consider claim 12, as applied to claim 11 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses wherein the pre-amplifier is attached to the mast (read as the antenna system having the pre-amplifier is mast-mounted, par [0001] and [0002]).
Consider claim 13, as applied to claim 11 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses wherein the pre-amplifier is integrated with the antenna in a unit attached to the mast (read as the amplifier/pre-amplifier is one of the circuit elements of antenna system, par [0039]-[0041 of Wilken).
Consider claim 14, as applied to claim 11 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses wherein the solar power unit comprises a solar panel and a rechargeable battery (read as the different power sources comprising solar cells and onboard batteries, par [0039]-[0041] of Wilken).
Claims 6, 7, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prior Art Admission by Applicant (hereinafter “APAA”, see Background of US 20240048223 A1) in view of Wilken (US 20170331185 A1), and in further view of Agtuca (US 20160108893 A1).
Consider claim 6, as applied to claim 5 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein the solar panel is situated remotely from the building.
Nonetheless, Agtuca discloses a power panel assembly that supplies power to multiple buildings and to a utility grid (par [0020]-[0021]); while it uses the term “nearby”, it does not state that the power panel assembly is within or immediately adjacent to any specific building; supplying power to multiple structures reasonably suggests the power panel assembly is positioned at a distance sufficient to serve several locations, which is consistent with being “located remotely from” any single building.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Agtuca into the teaching of APAA, as modified by Wilken, to use external power source such as nearby solar assembly in case in-building power sources fail.
Consider claim 7, as applied to claim 5 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, as modified by Wilken, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein the solar panel is situated in close proximity to the building.
Nonetheless, Agtuca discloses a power panel assembly that supplies power to multiple buildings and to a utility grid (par [0020]-[0021]); while it uses the term “nearby”, it does not state that the power panel assembly is within or immediately adjacent to any specific building; supplying power to multiple structures reasonably suggests the power panel assembly is positioned at a distance sufficient to serve several locations, which is consistent with being “located remotely from” any single building.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Agtuca into the teaching of APAA, as modified by Wilken, to use external power source such as nearby solar assembly in case in-building power sources fail.
Consider claim 15, as applied to claim 14 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein the solar panel is situated remotely from the building.
Nonetheless, Agtuca discloses a power panel assembly that supplies power to multiple buildings and to a utility grid (par [0020]-[0021]); while it uses the term “nearby”, it does not state that the power panel assembly is within or immediately adjacent to any specific building; supplying power to multiple structures reasonably suggests the power panel assembly is positioned at a distance sufficient to serve several locations, which is consistent with being “located remotely from” any single building.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Agtuca into the teaching of APAA, as modified by Wilken, to use external power source such as nearby solar assembly in case in-building power sources fail.
Consider claim 16, as applied to claim 14 above, APAA, APAA, as modified by Wilken, as modified by Wilken, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein the solar panel is situated in close proximity to the building.
Nonetheless, Agtuca discloses a power panel assembly that supplies power to multiple buildings and to a utility grid (par [0020]-[0021]); while it uses the term “nearby”, it does not state that the power panel assembly is within or immediately adjacent to any specific building; supplying power to multiple structures reasonably suggests the power panel assembly is positioned at a distance sufficient to serve several locations, which is consistent with being “located remotely from” any single building.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Agtuca into the teaching of APAA, as modified by Wilken, to use external power source such as nearby solar assembly in case in-building power sources fail.
Claims 8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prior Art Admission by Applicant (hereinafter “APAA”, see Background of US 20240048223 A1) in view of Wilken (US 20170331185 A1), and in further view of Blanchard (US 20070144105 A1).
Consider claim 8, as applied to claim 7 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein the solar panel is mounted on a rooftop of the building.
Nonetheless, Blanchard discloses roof-top structure can be a satellite dish, an antenna, a solar panel, par [0027].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Blanchard into the teaching of APAA, as modified by Wilken, to mount the solar panel with the antenna system on the rooftop of the building to utilize the open space of the rooftop to generate solar power.
Consider claim 17, as applied to claim 14 above, APAA, as modified by Wilken, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein the solar panel is mounted on a rooftop of the building.
Nonetheless, Blanchard discloses roof-top structure can be a satellite dish, an antenna, a solar panel, par [0027].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Blanchard into the teaching of APAA, as modified by Wilken, to mount the solar panel with the antenna system on the rooftop of the building to utilize the open space of the rooftop to generate solar power.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Junpeng Chen whose telephone number is (571) 270-1112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony S Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Junpeng Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645